This is very useful. I do have some small text notes: - "Adobe® Flash® Builder® 4.7 software is a development environment..." Don't need the word "software" - Is it "Haxe" or "haXe"? Should be consistent - for Cairngorm, this direct quote sounds like Apache Flex is certifying the framework in some special way: "... but dependent on core principles we believe are crucial to follow when developing enterprise RIAs." Should be trimmed to "... but dependent on core principles crucial to follow when developing enterprise RIAs." - I would recommend cutting the whole first sentence about WebOrb, as it is really the mission statement for Midnight Coders.
a On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 6:06 AM, Franck Wolff <frawo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Anyone? > > > 2014-03-25 15:03 GMT+01:00 Franck Wolff <frawo...@gmail.com>: > > > Hi, > > > > Here is the page about third-party tools and solutions (I don't know if > > attached files are accepted on this mailing list, tell me). > > > > I didn't try to create any comparison table, the projects listed having > > very different scope / kind of features. Each project / tool is listed > with > > a link and a pitch which comes from their respective websites. Many of > them > > are outdated and inactive, many of them are certainly not compliant with > > the Apache trademark policy. > > > > I have modified a page coming from the Apache Flex website and > integration > > should be straightforward. > > > > Franck. > > > > > > > > 2014-03-21 14:28 GMT+01:00 Franck Wolff <frawo...@gmail.com>: > > > > > >> 2014-03-20 19:16 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>: > >> > >> > >>> > >>> On 3/20/14 9:54 AM, "Franck Wolff" <frawo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> >I can certainly make sure that GraniteDS website is linking back to > >>> Apache > >>> >Flex (we already do that) and following the Apache trademark policy > (if > >>> I > >>> >understand what it is about ;) > >>> Sounds great. Let us know when you think you've conformed to the > policy > >>> and the Apache Flex PMC will review and make suggestions if needed. > And > >>> feel free to ask questions on the dev@ list if you're unsure of how to > >>> implement the policy. > >>> > >> > >> I think we already comply with the policy: we refer to either "Flex" or > >> "Apache Flex" on our website and we link to http://flex.apache.org/ on > >> our main pages. You can certainly find "Adobe Flex" in some of our old > blog > >> posts and documentations. I have added a notice about "Apache", "Apache > >> Flex" and "Flex" trademarks at the bottom of our site terms & > conditions ( > >> > http://www.granitedataservices.com/contact-us/site-terms-and-conditions-of-use/ > ). > >> We also have the full Apache 2 License in our distrib > >> (licenses/third-party/). > >> > >> BTW, according to this page: > http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/list/, > >> Flex isn't listed as a trademark of Apache but just as a project... > >> > >> Anyway, I would be happy if somebody from the Apache Flex PMC can have a > >> look at our website and make sure we are not infringing any Apache > policy. > >> > >> > >> > > >>> >However, I can't verify that all related projects are complying to > your > >>> >request and I'm certainly not the right person to ask them to do so... > >>> Right, that's the job of the PMC. We should ask each technology owner > >>> that is going to be in the list to conform before we actually put them > in > >>> the list (assuming they are still active). > >>> > >> > >> I will put everything I know related to Flex in the draft, you are free > >> to remove those who don't comply with the policy. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Franck. > >> > >> > >>> > >>> -Alex > >>> > >>> > >> > > > -- Andrew Wetmore http://cottage14.blogspot.com/ http://portfolio.cottage14.com https://sites.google.com/site/mvplaywrights/home
